AB 1490
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 1490 (Rendon) – As Introduced February 27, 2015
SUBJECT: Oil and gas: well stimulation treatments: seismic activities
SUMMARY: Prohibits well stimulation, and in some cases, wastewater disposal in limited
areas that are seismically active or have recently had an earthquake.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Requires the Department of Conservation’s Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources
(DOGGR) to regulate oil and gas wells, tanks, and facilities attendant to oil and gas
production.
2) Establishes, pursuant to SB 4 (Pavley, Chapter 313, Statutes of 2013), a comprehensive,
multi-agency regulatory program for oil and gas well stimulation treatments (e.g., hydraulic
fracturing, acid matrix stimulation). Establishes DOGGR as the lead agency for the multiagency regulatory program.
3) Requires, on or before January 1, 2015, the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to
conduct and complete an independent scientific study on well stimulation treatments,
including, but not limited to, hydraulic fracturing and acid well stimulation treatments.
4) Requires the scientific study to evaluate the hazards and risks and potential hazards and risks
that well stimulation treatments pose to natural resources and public, occupational, and
environmental health and safety, including induced seismicity.
5) Requires, on or before January 1, 2015, DOGGR, in consultation with the Department of
Toxic Substances Control, the State Air Resources Board (ARB), the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB), the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, and any
local air districts and regional water quality control boards in areas where well stimulation
treatments, including acid well stimulation treatments and hydraulic fracturing treatments,
may occur, to adopt rules and regulations specific to well stimulation treatments.
6) Pursuant to regulations adopted by DOGGR, prohibits a well operator, after the occurrence
of an earthquake of magnitude 2.7 or higher, from performing hydraulic fracturing on a well
within five times the axial dimensional stimulation area until DOGGR completes certain
evaluations and is satisfied that hydraulic fracturing within that radius does not create a
heightened risk of seismic activity.
THIS BILL:
1) Prohibits a well operator from conducting a well stimulation treatment following an
occurrence of an earthquake of magnitude 2.0 or higher, as determined by the United States
Geological Survey, on a well that is within a radius of an unspecified distance from the
epicenter of the earthquake, as determined by the United States Geological Survey (USGS),
until DOGGR completes an evaluation on whether there is a causal connection between the
AB 1490
Page 2
well stimulation treatment and the earthquake and is satisfied that the well stimulation
treatment does not create a heightened risk of seismic activity.
2) Prohibits wastewater disposal wells and all well stimulation treatments, including hydraulic
fracturing, within 10 miles of a recently active fault.
3) Defines “recently active fault” as a fault that has been active in the past 200 years.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1) Author’s statement.
The connection between earthquakes and fracking has received significant
attention in recent years. Recent fracking (hydraulic fracturing) legislation and
DOGGR regulations have considered this issue. Scientific research on their
relationship in California is underway. In other states with fracking, USGS has
concluded: ‘The increase in seismicity has been found to coincide with the
injection of wastewater in deep disposal wells in several locations, including
Colorado, Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Ohio. Much of this wastewater is a
byproduct of oil and gas production and is routinely disposed of by injection into
wells specifically designed and approved for this purpose.’ California has a long
history of earthquake activity and the connection to fracking requires further
study. In the meantime, fracking near earthquake faults should be on hold. As
defined in this bill, fracking near active faults accounts for about 54-60% of the
oil and gas extraction activity in California. (A Chevron representative cited the
60% estimate on April 15.) In addition, if an earthquake happens near fracking
activity, such activity should be shut down while the investigation into the
connection proceeds.
2) Scientific study. As stated above, USGS has found a connection between oil and gas activity
and increased seismicity in Colorado, Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Ohio. On January
14, 2015, California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) released Volume I of the
Independent Scientific Study required by SB 4 to the public. The key findings for Volume I
were:
a) Fracking practices in California appear to be very different from current practices used to
produce unconventional reservoirs in, for example, North Dakota, and Texas.
b) California fracked wells tend to be shallower, vertical, fracked in one location in the well
only, and use much smaller amounts of water on average.
c) Future expanded production in California is likely to be predominantly in the San Joaquin
basin where it is concentrated now. It remains highly uncertain how much oil is available
to be produced directly from the Monterey Shale.
d) Hydraulic fracturing, rather than acidizing, has been used much more frequently both
onshore and offshore.
AB 1490
Page 3
e) Available data indicate approximately 150 frack jobs occur onshore and about one
offshore per month.
f) Over the last decade, about 20% of California’s oil production has been from fracked
wells.
Volume II, which will specifically address direct and indirect seismic impacts, is expected to
be released by July 1, 2015. CCST did release a similar report commissioned by the Bureau
of Land Management. That study stated, “Produced water disposal in dedicated injection
wells (Class II wells according to EPA’s regulation for underground injection) presents the
possibility of triggering earthquakes.” In addition, it also stated:
There are no published reports of induced seismicity caused by wastewater
disposal related to oil and gas operations in California, and at present the seismic
hazard posed by wastewater injection is likely to be low. However, possible
correlations between seismicity and wastewater injection in California have not
yet been studied in detail. Injection of much larger volumes of produced water
from increased WST (well stimulation treatment) activity and the subsequent
increase in oil and gas production could increase the hazard, particularly in areas
of high, naturally occurring seismicity.
3) DOGGR Regulations. On December 30, 2014, the Office of Administrative Law (OAL)
approved and filed the final proposed regulations on well stimulation treatments with the
Office of the Secretary of State. The regulations contain similar language to AB 1490.
However, DOGGR regulations prohibit well stimulation when an earthquake occurs that is
2.7 or higher in magnitude rather than the 2.0 in AB 1490. In addition, DOGGR regulations
specify that no stimulation is to occur within five times the axial dimensional stimulation
area. In AB 1490 the distance is left blank, but the author has indicated he would be
interested in setting 10 miles as the distance. This would be clearer than five times the axial
dimensional stimulation area. DOGGR is concerned about the ability to detect a 2.0
earthquake accurately without extensive earthquake sensing equipment. The author and
committee may wish to consider amending the bill to inset 10 miles as the distance well
stimulation is prohibited from occurring within and adjusting the earthquake magnitude to
2.5 or higher, which according to seismology website UPSeis, is the lowest level that can be
felt and cause damage.
4) Related legislation.
SB 454 (Allen) prohibits DOGGR from submitting a proposal for an aquifer exemption to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) unless DOGGR and SWRCB concur in
writing that the aquifer meets specified conditions. This bill is awaiting a hearing in the Senate
Natural Resources and Water Committee on April 28.
SB 545 (Jackson, 2015) revises and updates DOGGR’s authority and permitting practices and
reforms the handling of confidential wells. This bill is awaiting a hearing in the Senate Natural
Resources and Water Committee on April 28.
SB 248 (Pavley) requires DOGGR to review and update its regulations, data management
practices, and enhance required reporting. This bill is awaiting a hearing in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
AB 1490
Page 4
AB 1501 (Rendon) requires air districts to establish an emission standard for methane from well
stimulation treatment and other petroleum extraction facilities. This bill requires the emission
standard to include a permit requirement and consideration of the effect production facilities
have on adjacent vulnerable populations. This bill requires ARB or a local air district to install
monitoring stations near any approved well stimulation site and other petroleum extraction
facilities to monitor for 12 different chemicals. This bill will also be heard by this committee on
April 27.
AB 356 (Williams) requires, prior to submitting a proposal to exempt an aquifer to U.S. EPA,
that DOGGR hold a public hearing and gain concurrence from SWRCB on the proposal. The bill
requires groundwater monitoring plans for underground injection projects as part of an
application for approval of the project or for the annual review of the project. This bill will also
be heard by this committee on April 27.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California League of Conservation Voters
Center for Biological Diversity
Citizens Coalition for a Safe Community
Clean Water Action
Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation
Environmental Working Group
Environment California
Frack Free Butte County
Los Padres Forest Watch
Save the Sespe
Sierra Club California
The Wildlands Conservancy
Wholly H2O
Opposition
Associated Builders and Contractors of California
California Chamber of Commerce
California Independent Petroleum Association
National Federation of Independent Businesses
Western States Petroleum Association
Analysis Prepared by: Michael Jarred / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092